Article from The Atlantic about the gender gap in the Occupy movement.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/11/the-occupy-movements-wo…
"What is Occupy's solution to its gender disparity problem? Occupy LA has a
code of conduct and a zero tolerance policy for any violence or assault. Of
course, it also lacks the ability to keep people out of the public space
the camp is in."
Sort of sounds familiar ;-)
--
<http://www.glamwiki.org>
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
Maybe someone can help me understand where I'm going astray here.
I wrote an article about one of my favorite comic book artists of the
1940s, a woman named Lily Renée. I first posted it to the Women in Comics
wikia I run (http://womenincomics.wikia.com/<http://womenincomics.wikia.com/wiki/Lily_Ren%C3%A9e>)
before
deciding it was good and notable enough to put on Wikipedia proper (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_Renée)
I went to check on it recently and found it has been flagged with this
notice:
"This article is written like a personal reflection or essay rather than an
encyclopedic description of the subject. Please help improve it by
rewriting it in an encyclopedic style."
Now, I'm the first to admit I probably could have cited it better, though
all the information I wrote came from the two interviews I did cite. But
I'm really not seeing how it is "written like a personal reflection or
essay", as they define it, i.e. it has no primary research, she is not a
"personal invention", it does not state my "feelings" on the topic, nor is
it a "discussion forum". (viz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#PUBLISHER)
It IS however written in "summary" style, and uses proper formal language
(viz:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Encyclopedic_style#Information_style…
)
Do you think whoever flagged it really meant it just needs to be cited
better, or is there something I'm not seeing?
Thanks,
Alexa
Hi everyone,
I'm starting a list of media (specifically still photography but with
potential for video, as well) which needs improvement or doesn't exist on
Commons. Not specifically "women's themes" (we all love to argue what that
is), but, media that might involve women (doesn't have to be sexual in
nature) or you believe is male-dominated in certain themes and lacks in
equal gender representation.
This can include subjects or content like:
- Contemporary female painters
- Manicures
- Pierced females (they are often either anthropological images or
really poor casual/cutesy myspace style snapshots wiped off of Flickr) (for
males, too)
- Hairstyles
- Clothing
Just tossing out ideas. You're welcome to post here to the list or email me
directly.
And as always, I encourage you to assist in curating Commons and uploading
quality educational content to make it a healthier and better place. The
Commons uploader is really great and I think rather cut and dry, but, if I
can ever be of any assistance in helping you learn how to use Commons and
upload content, just ask.
Right now, I believe there are upwards of only about 3-5 active "open"
female contributors to the project, which probably contributes to the
unhealthy atmosphere and lack of representational content.
Thanks,
Sarah
--
<http://www.glamwiki.org>
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
I've heard about this kind of thing happening to other women in Wikipedia,
but this is the first time this has ever happened to me personally. A few
weeks ago, I got a phone call from a guy who said he wanted to talk to me
about what it was like being the parent of children with special needs. He
also said that he got my number from my church, so I told him that I was
busy at the moment (which I was) and that he could call me back later.
Yesterday afternoon, he called me back. I asked him where he got my number
and how he found out about my parenting status. He said that he read what
I had written on Wikipedia about my children, and that he wanted to talk to
me about it because he was also developmentally disabled and had some
"syndrome" that I didn't recognize. (It wasn't Asberger's, I don't
think.) He also said that he had gotten my number from "some church
thing," and that they had confirmed my phone number.
I told him that it was very inappropriate for him to call me, and he said,
"Well, you said I could call you back!" I answered that I was in the
middle of something the first time he called me, repeated how inappropriate
he was being, and that I wasn't willing to speak with him over the phone.
He said, "You said all that on Wikipedia," and I said that I didn't have my
phone number there, to which he responded, "But your email address is
there," and I said he could email me but calling me was again,
inappropriate, and we hung up.
Like I said, it was the first time something like this has happened, even
after more than four years of active participation in WP. It's somewhat
disconcerting to me. When I think about it, this guy had to actively hunt
down my phone number. He looked at my userpage, which has infoboxes
stating that I'm a parent of two children with developmental disabilities,
that I live in a small town in Idaho, and that I'm Catholic. (This makes
me want to remove those infoboxes.) He actually went to the trouble of
calling one of the the two Catholic churches in my town and confirm my
number with them, which they did quite honestly because I'm on a church
committee and active in the community. Freaky, huh?
I know that you need to tell people when something like this happens,
especially people in your life. (I haven't been able to tell my husband
about it yet; he's been working all weekend and we're coming off of a
particularly stressful family situation.) So that's what I'm doing now. I
can totally see why so many women don't identify their gender on WP now.
I'd also like to get some advice from the members of this list, and to see
if anyone else has had a similar experience and what they did about it.
Thanks,
Christine
--
Christine W. Meyer
User: Figureskatingfan
christinewmeyer(a)gmail.com
Hi everyone,
I wanted to share the latest write-up by UK Wikipedian Panyd (Fiona) about
the need for women in Wikipedia. As we know, she hosts the awesome Girl
Geek Dinners in England! (And yes, she knows it's 9% not 13%....but hey,
it's low regardless...)
http://www.manchestergirlgeeks.com/wikipedia-needs-you/
And two other events that Fiona has developed for this weekend:
1) Tomorrow is the Manchester Girl Geeks edit-a-thon! Six Wikipedians will
be hanging out and teaching 16 women how to edit Wikipedia! We are going to
develop following up with the participants via online ambassador style
post-event, so let us know if you want to be involved.[1]
2) Sunday evening Sue will be speaking at Imperial College London about the
"Participation of Female Editors on Wikipedia and its Sister Projects"[2]
Thank Fiona for all your hard work to "mind the gap!" and I know we all
look forward to learning about how the weekend goes..!
-Sarah
[1]http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetup/Manchester_Girl_Geeks
[2]
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meetup/Sue_Gardner_at_Imperial_College_London
--
<http://www.glamwiki.org>
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
Earlier today, a long-standing editor was reported to AN/I for making
personal attacks. The specific attacks were the following two posts:
"You simply display your ignorance."
"Please carry on, so everyone can see what an ignorant arse you are."
As I had recently warned this same user for making personal attacks, and
they have a long history of attacking other editors (blocked 4 times
previously for personal attacks), I put a 24 hour block on their account
for violating WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA.
Even though this seems like a pretty minor slap on the wrist, my block
was quickly undone by another admin and a slew of editors then
vociferously attacked me for blocking (calling me a "petty tyrant", a
"wannabe big-dick admin", etc.).
I looked more carefully at the editor's block log and noticed that every
one of their blocks for personal attacks had been undone by another
admin (usually without much delay).
This seems to say a lot about the current culture of en.wiki. Namely,
that WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA are not taken seriously by our community (or at
least a large percentage). As civility seems to be a recurring issue in
gendergap discussions (and Sarah's recent survey), I was wondering what
people's thoughts on this issue are. Has en.wiki become a toxic
environment or am I just overreacting to normal behavior?
Ryan Kaldari
Stumbled across this while doing a bit of assessing for projects..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallen_woman
Needs some work. Turns out it was originally redirected to prostitute.
-Sarah
--
<http://www.glamwiki.org>
Sarah Stierch Consulting
*Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.*
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/